Chicago viewers might have to get up to speed on what a multicast station is to watch Cubs games next year.

As the Cubs sort out what to do with the WGN-9 portion of their 70 to 75 television games in 2015, the team is considering an option that is highly unconventional, if not a bit out there: Launching a version of a Cubs network on a multicast station, according to sources familiar with the situation.

This takes some explaining.

A multicast outlet is a sub-channel for local over-the-air broadcast stations. They became more prevalent with cable and satellite providers converting to digital platforms in the last decade. On Comcast's channel guide, most of the multicast stations are bunched in the mid 300s. Currently, these stations mostly air classic TV shows such as "Bonanza" and "The Brady Bunch," or syndicated programming such as cooking shows.

The Cubs reportedly are eager to start their own network. They currently can't do it on cable because of terms of their deal with Comcast SportsNet, which runs through 2019.

However, the multicast stations aren't considered cable; they are broadcast because they are transmitted over-the-air. That would provide the Cubs the opportunity to start some sort of a team-branded channel. The Cubs would produce the telecasts and sell and keep all the advertising revenue.

Crane Kenney, Cubs president for business operations, and WGN officials declined comment on the multicast possibility. A Cubs source said the team still is considering many options and isn't close to making a final decision.

Why would the Cubs go the multicast route and leave a powerful and familiar station as WGN-9?

Last fall, the Cubs exercised an option to opt out of their deal with WGN, which ran through 2022. At a minimum, the team needed to sync up their TV contracts so they all conclude after 2019, enabling them to start a network with all their games in 2020 outside Major League Baseball's national deals.

WGN, which pays the Cubs in the neighborhood of $250,000 per game, reportedly is losing as much as $200,000 per telecast because of record low ratings in recent years. The station wants to continue its long relationship with the Cubs, but also is anxious to stem some of the financial bleeding. Sources say WGN has offered the Cubs a new deal that would include a small rights fee and a revenue sharing component. Fees would remain low for poor ratings during the rebuilding process, but they could be much higher if viewers return in droves for a contending team.

According to sources, Kenney isn't eager to sign a deal that would give the Cubs considerably less in guaranteed money, especially at a time when the Dodgers are doing a multi-billion dollar local TV contract.

One industry insider said it would be "tough for Crane to go back to WGN for less than what he had originally had."

That has forced Kenney to get creative and at least take a look at the multicast option. On the surface, it would seem to be complicated and highly questionable as to whether it would be more profitable for the Cubs.

The Cubs would incur production costs to air the games; probably in the $25,000-35,000 range per game plus studio shows. They also would have to pay a fee for time on a multicast outlet.

Unlike cable, it seems highly unlikely the Cubs would earn much in the way of subscriber fees for a multicast station from the cable and satellite companies, according to industry sources. That would leave advertising as their main source of income. If advertising revenue is down for WGN, why would it be any different for the Cubs on a multicast station?

Also, the Cubs would lose viewers because a multicast station doesn't have the reach of WGN. Currently, AT&T doesn't have multicast stations and DirecTV and Dish almost never carry them, according to industry sources. The Cubs also would have to negotiate deals one-by-one with providers outside of Chicago in Downstate Illinois, Iowa and Indiana, areas that are considered their local territory.

Plus in Chicago and elsewhere, the concept would require a considerable learning curve for viewers to find the games on the new and relatively unknown outlet.

Then there is the time element. It is nearing July, very late in the game with a TV contract expiring at the end of the year. If the Cubs are going to go the multicast route, they need to assemble an in-house production and sales team quickly, no small task.

The Cubs' options appear to be limited. The WGN games can't be shifted to CSN, because its menu is full, and the network reportedly isn't interested in using spillover outlets. There had been speculation Fox might become involved in some way, laying the foundation for a partnership in a new Cubs network in 2020. However, all appears to be quiet on that front.

What else is out there? Only Kenney knows for sure, and perhaps he is working on something else that is unconventional. The pressure is on him to deliver much-needed TV revenue to help Theo Epstein turn the Cubs into a winner.

The clock is ticking and there has to be a resolution soon. The easy answer would be for the Cubs to stay with WGN through 2019. However, just in case, Chicago sports viewers might want to learn where to find the multicast stations.

The Cubs would incur production costs to air the games; probably in the $25,000-35,000 range per game plus studio shows. They also would have to pay a fee for time on a multicast outlet.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

Wait a second. WGN TV pays 250k a game. And they claim they lose 200k a game? So they only sell 50k worth of ads per game? Really?

I know the Cubs have sucked and ratings are down, but that doesn't make sense. Just off the top of my head I'll bet a Cubs game has 50 spots. At least. I mean they go to break after every half inning and during pitching changes.

So that means they are only selling those spots for $1,000 each. It's WGN. Seen across the country. Cubs fans are everywhere. That's the best they can do?

I think I read that the Dodgers are getting paid like 3 million a game in their new deal and they're not on a super station.

I'm willing to bet WGN TV is not telling the truth. If WGN claims to lose 200k a game and they have 70 games, it means they are losing 14 million a year. That can't be right.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

They also have expenses. Not just anyone can take shots of hot chicks in bikinis.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

350k

He's worth more when he's not spread so thin.

If the Cubs have 100,000 people watching, by the above ratio, they should be selling the spots for 3,000 a spot. And I'd say it's more like 200,000 watching the Cubs game. So that's 6k a spot. Which means they make 300k (assuming my 50 spots is correct) a game while paying 250k a game. Which mean, with their 70 games, WGN TV makes a 3.5 million dollar profit. Let's account for expenses and cost production and knock off 1 million for that. So it's a net 2.5 million dollar profit for WGN TV per year.

This is pretty interesting though. For the first time, "The Plan" is having actual repercussions as no one seems willing to trust that the Cubs will start trying to win soon.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

Yeah, imagine that. It's almost as if you can't shit up the joint for years on end in the #3 media market without the #3 media getting sick of it. I mean, the Cubs are getting less money from WBBM than they were getting from WGN, with the proviso that CBS Radio would help them book concerts at Wrigley to make up the difference. I don't trust that Wilco At Wrigley: An XRT Show will make up the difference. The neighborhood hates having more concerts as it is.

EDIT: ooh, I didn't even see the part about how AT&T doesn't carry digital subchannels. So no one with U-Verse will be able to watch about half the Cubs games if this happens. The Plan! I sure hope City of Fools and denisdman have Xfinity.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

Why would the Cubs go the multicast route and leave a powerful and familiar station as WGN-9?

Last fall, the Cubs exercised an option to opt out of their deal with WGN, which ran through 2022. At a minimum, the team needed to sync up their TV contracts so they all conclude after 2019, enabling them to start a network with all their games in 2020 outside Major League Baseball’s national deals.

WGN, which pays the Cubs in the neighborhood of $250,000 per game, reportedly is losing as much as $200,000 per telecast because of record low ratings in recent years. The station wants to continue its long relationship with the Cubs, but also is anxious to stem some of the financial bleeding. Sources say WGN has offered the Cubs a new deal that would include a small rights fee and a revenue sharing component. Fees would remain low for poor ratings during the rebuilding process, but they could be much higher if viewers return in droves for a contending team.

According to sources, Kenney isn’t eager to sign a deal that would give the Cubs considerably less in guaranteed money, especially at a time when the Dodgers are doing a multi-billion dollar local TV contract.
http://www.shermanreport.com/multicast- ... J2cE7.uxfs

Dodgers games are only shown on Time Warner Cable. And very few people have Time Warner Cable. It is backfiring in LA.

Cubs shouldn't sign a new TV deal until they put a better product on the field.

That is to say, it backfired on TWC. Dodgers don't give a shit.

The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.

Exactly.

Which is why this deal is actually a very smart move, (for once), by the Cubs and ole Crane.

It means that the Cubbies are betting that there product will be very good for years to come by 2019. And by owning their rights at that time, they will be looking at a payday similar to what the Dodgers received. Which would make the $250K per broadcast for a couple of years look like a drop in the ocean compared to what they will get on their own.

It's a risk. But it's a VERY SMART MOVE. Not something stupid like it has been portrayed here.

But it is stupid. The Padres got a stupid TV deal. That became the baseline for bigger and more stupid deals like the Dodgers. But when the cable companies are choking on it, it's not just going to keep happening.

Also, I think the Dodgers should care. The Blackhawks nearly destroyed a strong brand because the games weren't televised, and the only reason the Cubs haved "owned" Chicago for the last thirty years is because the Sox foolishly went to UHF in the late 60s/early 70s.

The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.